Quotes of the Day:
“They lived freely among the students, they argued with the men over philosophical, sociological and artistic matters, they were just as good as the men themselves: only better, since they were women.”
- D.H. Lawrence, Lady Chatterley's Lover
"Future shock [is] the shattering stress and disorientation that we induce in individuals by subjecting them to too much change in too short a time."
- Alvin Toffler
How can you tell when a political ideology has become the equivalent of a religion?
- Andrew Sullivan
1. Sherman, Colleagues Send Letter to Biden Administration Urging the Pursuit of Peace on the Korean Peninsula
2. Is Your Representative Being Influenced by Extremists to Support a Bill Granting Concessions to North Korea?
3. North Korea tells military to prepare for winter as government lowers fuel allotments
4. North Korean hospital mum on cause of death for 10 ‘suspected’ COVID-19 patients
5. U.S. seeks closer ties with S. Korea for resilient supply chains: key diplomat
6. S. Korea, IAEA hold talks on N. Korean nukes, Fukushima water release
7. Korean presidential hopeful vows big foreign policy shifts
8. Should Our Security Controls Be More Like North Korea or Norway?
9. US repeats decision on when to change command has not yet come
10. Seoul monitoring N. Korea's move to mark 10th anniv. of Kim's leadership: ministry
11. N. Korea calls for efforts to achieve economic goals under five-year plan
12. Moon's push for end-of-war declaration losing momentum: experts
1. Sherman, Colleagues Send Letter to Biden Administration Urging the Pursuit of Peace on the Korean Peninsula
I would urge Congressman Sherman and his comrades to think about these points:
There is one thing all Korea watchers have in common with the Korean people in the South and North, Americans in the United States and that is the desire for peace on the Korean peninsula. Most all want a peaceful resolution to the “Korea question” as outlined in Paragraph 60 of the 1953 Armistice Agreement. That “question” requires a resolution to the unnatural division of the peninsula.
Unfortunately, the common belief among one group of Korea watchers (me included) is that the threat to peace comes from one source: the mafia-like crime family cult known as the Kim family regime which continues to receive crucial support from China. They believe the nature, objectives, and strategy of the regime are the hostile elements in the region. The regime employs a political warfare strategy that is supported by blackmail diplomacy with the long-term preparation to use force when the regime deems the conditions in its favor. It is constantly seeking to achieve these conditions. It is executing a seven decades old strategy of subversion, coercion-extortion, and use of force to achieve unification dominated by the Guerrilla Dynasty and Gulag State we know as North Korea in order to ensure the survival of the regime. In support of that strategy Kim Jong-un’s objective is to split the ROK/U.S. alliance to drive U.S. forces off the peninsula to achieve a favorable balance of military capabilities to execute his campaign plan to unify the peninsula. There is no evidence that Kim has abandoned his family’s strategy and objectives of the last 70 years.
Since 1953 the Armistice, along with the strength of the Combined ROK/U.S. Combined Forces Command, has prevented a resumption of hostilities through conventional and extended nuclear deterrence. Unfortunately, this has led to complacency in the South and the U.S. and the belief by some that the war can now simply be declared over and that such a declaration will influence Kim to re-start North-South engagement and come to the table to negotiate denuclearization. It is believed that such a declaration will prove to Kim that the ROK/U.S. alliance does not have a hostile policy toward the North. Sadly, no one is asking about eliminating Kim Jong-un’s hostile policy toward the ROK and the outside world.
As the U.S. Congress considers H.R. 3446 it is imperative that it hears from Korea Watchers who provide critical analysis of Kim Jong-un and the negative impact on South Korea and U.S. interests if the law is passed without necessary amendments. They must provide recommendations to protect U.S. interests and ensure the security of the ROK. Although it may seem counterintuitive, an end of war declaration will not mean peace. It will lead to conflict due to Kim Jong-un’s unrelenting hostile intent. Paper and words do not trump steel.
Sherman, Colleagues Send Letter to Biden Administration Urging the Pursuit of Peace on the Korean Peninsula
Nov 8, 2021
Press Release
Washington, D.C. – Congressman Brad Sherman and his colleagues sent a letter to President Joseph R. Biden and Secretary of State Antony Blinken urging the administration to join our ally South Korea in working towards an official end to the state of war between North Korea, South Korea, and the United States.
Earlier this year, our ally South Korea reiterated its call for an end to the 1950 state of war between North Korea, South Korea, and the United States. While the war’s fighting ended in 1953, a peace treaty was never signed and the declaration of war has continued to this day. The official end to the declared state of war is not a concession to North Korea, but rather a vital step towards peace that serves the interest of the United States and our ally South Korea alike.
“An official end to the state of war is a critical first step that allows South Korea to build the trust necessary to pursue critical U.S. and South Korean objectives, such as restarting stalled talks on denuclearization,” Sherman said. “My colleagues and I urge the Biden Administration to prioritize working with President Moon Jae-In on this critical step towards peace on the Korean peninsula.”
Congressman Sherman was joined by Representatives Tom Suozzi, Karen Bass, Ro Khanna, Barbara Lee, Carolyn B. Maloney, Dwight Evans, Judy Cu, Andy Kim, Ilhan Omar, Paul Tonko, Jesus G. “Chuy” Garcia, Rashida Tlaib, Pramila Jayapal, Raul M. Grijalva, Jan Schakowsky, James P. McGovern, Grace Meng, Andy Levin, Marilyn Strickland, Kaiali’i Kahele, Katie Porter, and Al Green in sending the letter.
A copy of the letter is available here.
###
2. Is Your Representative Being Influenced by Extremists to Support a Bill Granting Concessions to North Korea?
Lawrence Peck provides some very provocative analysis here. He has long studied the activities of north Korea in the South and US and how they try to develop agents of influence and exploit useful idiots.
Is Your Representative Being Influenced by Extremists to Support a Bill Granting Concessions to North Korea?
On May 20, 2021, Congressman Brad Sherman (D-CA) introduced a bill in the House of Representatives, designated H. R. 3446, with the initial co-sponsorship of fellow Democrats Ro Khanna, Andy Kim and Grace Meng. The bill has been co-sponsored by about two dozen other legislators. This dangerous bill, damaging to U.S. national security and the cause of freedom in Asia, has the innocent-sounding but deeply misleading title of "Peace on the Korean Peninsula Act." More accurately, it should be named the "Unreciprocated Concessions to North Korea Act" or the "Undeserved Gift and Dream Come True for Kim Jong-un Act." This bill amounts to a "wishlist" of North Korea, since it grants almost every demand the North has made in recent years.
H. R. 3446 calls on our government to relax the current travel ban on North Korea for American citizens, sign a so-called peace agreement with the North to replace the 1953 Korean War Armistice Agreement, and exchange liaison offices with the North. What is particularly outrageous about the bill is what it fails to mention.
The bill does not demand that the North in any way reciprocate in exchange for the U.S. granting these concessions. It does not demand that the North live up to several commitments made over many years to the U.S., South Korea, and the international community to denuclearize. It does not mention the North's acts of aggression at the DMZ and on the seas surrounding Korea, nor its violations of the 1953 Armistice Agreement, nor its assassinations and attempts to murder opponents. The bill also totally ignores the imprisonment and torture of Americans, including Korean-Americans, who visited the North before the travel ban. Human rights groups are appalled that the bill neglects to mention the North's human rights abuses and crimes against humanity.
There are two major types of groups and individuals collaborating to lobby Congress in support of this bill. The first are pro-North Korean organizations and activists in the U.S., who are to varying degrees in sympathy with the North. These include pro-North "front" groups as well as those of a more openly pro-North variety. The second are pro-Moon Jae-in organizations and activists in the U.S. They support South Korea's appeasement-minded President Moon and his leftist Democratic Party of Korea.
The pro-North forces, which have been promoting the bill and lobbying legislators to co-sponsor it, are extremists so far out of the mainstream, so far on the radical fringe, that it is difficult to understand why members of Congress would meet with them, any more than such members would meet with others on the extreme right or left who hold anti-American, anti-U.S. military views, and who are apologists for, sympathizers with, or supporters of North Korea. These extremists, the real forces behind the bill, are on record opposing U.S. involvement in the Korean War, condemning the U.S. as an "imperialist" and "militarist" force for evil in the world, denying or downplaying North Korea's terrorist and other attacks for decades, claiming the North needs nuclear arms for "self-defense," calling for the withdrawal of what they term U.S. "occupation" forces not only from South Korea, but also from the entire Pacific, including Guam and even Hawaii, harshly denouncing U.S. allies such as Israel, participating in propaganda activities during visits to North Korea, smearing human rights activists and defectors from the North, and blaming America for every problem on the Korean peninsula, while absolving the North of responsibility for its criminal behavior.
Many readers would probably like to ask the following questions to Representatives Sherman, Khanna, Kim, Meng, and the others who have co-sponsored the bill:
Question:
- Are you aware of the facts that one of the key lobbyists targeting you in support of H. R. 3446, Christine Ahn, one of the top leaders of Women Cross DMZ / Korea Peace Now (the latter being essentially under the guidance of and serving as a de facto lobbying arm of the former), and her group, are on record as making the following statements?
Recommended
Spencer Brown
(above statements by Christine Ahn of "Women Cross DMZ / Korea Peace Now")
An official "Women Cross DMZ" statement strongly condemned the U.S. military for supposedly having "wreaked violence and instability around the world," opposed what it termed "anti-China rhetoric," for creating tensions, stridently denounced Israel as an alleged "settler colonial state," and demanded an end to U.S. political and military support for Israel.
Question:
Question:
Representatives Sherman, Khanna, Kim, and Meng, in addition to the other co-sponsors of the bill, owe the American people, and particularly their constituents, an explanation as to why they allowed themselves to be manipulated by extremists. Inquiring minds would specifically like to hear from Sherman as to why he and his staff have allowed themselves to be influenced by stridently anti-Israel groups and activists lobbying for the bill.
3. North Korea tells military to prepare for winter as government lowers fuel allotments
Yes I fear a deliberate attack from the north. despite the severe problems it has. We should not be lulled into complacency by these reports. But I fear more what will happen when there is internal instability and the loss of coherency of the military and the ability of the military to support the regime. I especially fear when the regime has to "deprioritize" certain military units which it is appearing to do now. Counterintuitively this weakness in the north could lead to conflict for which we may NOT be prepared unless we are working on the contingency plans now.
How long with the three "chains of control" being able to maintain control over the military? (the three chains: traditional military, political officer, and security officer). It will be how those three officers at every level act and react and cooperate to ensure stability and control that will be a key contributor to stability within the military or the loss of coherence. I hate to say I told you so, but the question should be asked: how have we worked to prepare the information and influence environment of the last 20 years to be able to influence key 2d tier leaders when they are faced with a crisis? Unfortunately we have done nothing to prepare for the very likely contingencies we may face in the near future. As the Chinese say, when is the best time to plant a tree? 20 years ago. When is the next best time? Now. We need to get to work in the information and influence space to have any chance of influencing events and outcomes.
North Korea tells military to prepare for winter as government lowers fuel allotments
Undersupplied units must submit daily reports on their progress, causing anxiety for military officials.
North Korea has ordered all military units to submit daily reports on their preparations for winter, frustrating military officials who feel like they are being pitted against each other in competition for firewood and other resources after the government reduced their allotments of coal and gas, military sources told RFA.
This year winter weather has come earlier than usual. Snowfall hindered the efforts of military units to go out into the forests to collect firewood. Even if the weather had been better, military units may not have had enough gasoline to haul the wood back to base given the supply issues.
“In the mountainous area of Ryanggang province, a lot of snow has already accumulated, making it difficult for the soldiers who cut firewood, and it is also difficult to transport the firewood to the unit,” a military source in the central northern province of Ryanggang told RFA’s Korean Service Monday.
“Additionally, the military authorities are supplying the units with much less gasoline this year, and the market price of gas is way too high, so the units cannot afford to operate any of the vehicles that transport firewood,” said the source.
The General Staff Department, the General Political Bureau, and the Ministry of Defense dispatched agents on Nov. 1 to encourage the winter preparation performance of units, the source said.
Units are required to write detailed plans on how they will prepare for the winter and report daily on their progress, said the source, who requested anonymity for security reasons. But unit leaders are worried that a lack of resources will hinder their efforts, said the source.
“As each unit’s capabilities have been mobilized to collect firewood, the most important winter preparation task, sealing windows in buildings and performing maintenance on ondol systems have fallen on the backburner,” the source said, referring to the traditional Korean underfloor heating systems.
“In addition, soldiers have to make enough kimchi to last the winter. They are complaining about having to work day and night. But the authorities do not take their situation into consideration. They feel like the daily reports are a way of driving each unit to compete with each other to see who can prepare the best,” the source said.
In the plains of North Pyongan province, two provinces to the west of Ryanggang, coal is the heating source of choice, as there are few areas to collect firewood, a military source there told RFA.
“This year, the amount of coal allocated to each unit is insufficient, so it is necessary for us to gather firewood instead. But since trees are so hard to find, the soldiers dig for peat as a substitute. Wet peat must be dried before it can be burned, and it cannot be used in all applications,” said the second source, who requested anonymity to speak freely.
The coronavirus pandemic has caused prices for firewood and other materials to rise sharply, according to the second source.
“Military officials are also expressing dissatisfaction with their superiors who are forcing them to compete with other military units on how well they are preparing, all while ignoring the situation of front-line units and failing to provide adequate supplies needed to prepare,” this source said.
Supply issues extend to more than just fuel and food. The Seoul-based Korea Times newspaper reported North Korea cannot supply even special forces units in its “million-man army” with proper winter uniforms.
Army regulations state that the uniforms should be replaced every year, but the government has supplied new winter uniforms only once in the last four years, the report said.
A lack of raw materials due to the shutdown of the border with China at the start of the coronavirus pandemic almost two years ago, combined with clothing manufacturers closing their operations during the resulting economic catastrophe were contributing factors.
Special forces units have even resorted to robbing civilians, former soldiers who escaped North Korea told RFA in a previous report.
Translated by Leejin Jun for RFA’s Korean Service. Written in English by Eugene Whong.
4. North Korean hospital mum on cause of death for 10 ‘suspected’ COVID-19 patients
This could be a sign of things to come.
North Korean hospital mum on cause of death for 10 ‘suspected’ COVID-19 patients
Citizens say that the government is lying to them about how many people have died from the coronavirus.
A hospital in North Korea sent 10 people with COVID-19 symptoms to an unheated ward in freezing temperatures, and then falsified the causes of their deaths to maintain Pyongyang’s claim that the country is completely virus free, sources in the country told RFA.
The 10 patients were admitted to a section of the hospital that is normally used to treat tuberculosis, a resident of Chongjin in the northeastern province of North Hamgyong, where the hospital is located, told RFA’s Korean Service.
“The hospital said they died from malnutrition, but these were people who complained of fever and were diagnosed with pneumonia caused by the flu,” said the source, who requested anonymity for security reasons.
“They were left in a part of the ward with no heating, despite the cold weather. They all died soon after,” the source said.
Since the start of the pandemic in January 2020, North Korea has taken extensive measures to prevent the spread of the coronavirus, which causes COVID. The government locked down entire cities and counties, banned travel between provinces, and shutdown the Sino-Korean border, which included a suspension of trade with China. The trade ban was partially lifted earlier this month, only to be reinstated again after a new outbreak in the Chinese border city of Dandong.
Pyongyang declared these “preventative measures” successful in April 2020, when Pak Myong Su, the director of the anti-epidemic department of North Korea’s Central Emergency Anti-Epidemic Headquarters, gave a rare interview with foreign media to proclaim that “not a single person was infected” with the virus in the country.
Observers immediately doubted the claim, citing North Koreas’ crumbling medical infrastructure, the relative ease by which people could cross the Sino-Korean border, and the willingness of the regime to hide the truth.
Additionally, RFA reported in April 2020 that the government warned the public that COVID was spreading in three areas of the country, including the capital Pyongyang.
The following March, RFA reported that the North Korean government has been keeping track of “suspected cases” of coronavirus infections but never confirms anyone showing symptoms as having COVID. Sources said that when a person suspected of having the disease dies, the body is hastily cremated to prevent a posthumous confirmation.
Similar tactics were at play for the 10 “tuberculosis patients” in Chongjin, the resident told RFA.
“The hospital informed the patients’ families only and they immediately buried the bodies at a nearby hill without explaining the exact cause of death. The families are angry, saying they should at least be told what the symptoms were and get a clear answer on why they died.”
The government has continued to keep people in the dark about the truth of the coronavirus situation in the country, a resident of Mundok county, South Pyongan province, north of the capital Pyongyang, told RFA.
“No one has died from the coronavirus in North Korea because the public will never know about it. Hospitals announce those deaths are due to tuberculosis [TB] or flu,” said the second source, who requested anonymity to speak freely.
Authorities are leaving domestic coronavirus cases out of the news cycle and falsely claiming coronavirus deaths as TB cases, said the second source.
“If you look closely, tuberculosis doesn’t destroy the lungs like the coronavirus does. But most people don’t know that so when someone dies from coronavirus and they say it’s tuberculosis, who is going to know?” said the source.
“No one knows … other than the doctor who was in charge and the central government officials,” the source said, adding that in his neighborhood there were three recent deaths chalked up to TB.
With the weather turning colder, flu cases are on the rise and death tolls are up as well, the source said.
“But most of them are filed as deaths from malnutrition or flu, not the coronavirus,” the source said.
An internal survey conducted by the Ministry of Health in March 2021 revealed some 13,000 “suspected cases” in North Hamgyong, the most in the entire country, a source told RFA in a previous report.
According to the survey’s results, officially reported only to the ruling Korean Workers’ Party’s Central Committee, most of the suspected cases were in the cities, including the provincial capital Chongjin, North Korea’s third largest city and home to more than 600,000 people.
Meanwhile, the World Health Organization said that as of Sept. 21, only about 43,000 of North Korea’s population of 25 million were tested for COVID-19, and there was not a single confirmed case.
Of those tested between Sept. 15 and 21, 109 had a flu-like illness or severe acute respiratory infection, and 582 were health care workers.
Reported by Jieun Kim for RFA’s Korean Service. Translated by Claire Lee. Written in English by Eugene Whong.
5. U.S. seeks closer ties with S. Korea for resilient supply chains: key diplomat
Our alliance is more than a military one.
(Yonhap Interview) U.S. seeks closer ties with S. Korea for resilient supply chains: key diplomat | Yonhap News Agency
By Kim Eun-jung
SEOUL, Nov. 12 (Yonhap) -- The U.S. State Department official in charge of East Asian and Pacific affairs on Friday emphasized the need for closer cooperation between Washington and Seoul to ensure the resilience of major global supply chains and to protect critical technologies from excessive dependence on a single country.
Assistant Secretary Daniel Kritenbrink said the issue was discussed in a string of meetings he held with senior South Korean officials here, which he described as a "productive" exchange.
"One of the issues that we did discuss was related to economic security," he said in an exclusive interview with Yonhap News Agency at the U.S. ambassador's residence in Seoul.
He stressed, "It's in our collective interest to ensure that all of us are building resilient supply chains resistant to disruption, and avoiding situations where all of us are overly dependent on one country or one market for those critical supply chains."
He was wrapping up a three-day visit here as part of his first overseas trip since assuming the post in September.
The choice of Seoul was intended to send "a clear and unmistakable signal" about the emphasis that Washington places on its regional security.
The shared prosperity of South Korea and the U.S. in the future is "entirely intertwined," he said, adding that, "Our success is your success, and vice versa."
He noted that South Korea is a global leader in such key sectors as semiconductors and batteries and welcomed new investment plans in the U.S by leading Korean companies.
Major South Korean companies in the semiconductor, battery and auto sectors announced over $40 trillion won (US$35.3 billion) combined investment plans in the U.S. in May, when their CEOs accompanied President Moon Jae-in on his visit to Washington for a summit with President Joe Biden.
Asked about South Korea's dilemma, sandwiched between China and the U.S., he said Washington is concerned about a range of Chinese actions in recent years, some of which are believed to undermine the rule-based order.
"We do have concerns about various Chinese efforts to use economic coercion against various countries across the region," he said. "We've made very clear that the way that we look at our relationship with China is primarily through the lens of competition. But we believe that competition should be carried out very responsibly."
Regarding news reports that Biden plans to hold virtual summit talks with his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping next week, Kritenbrink said, "We want to avoid any situation where there's a potential miscalculation that could lead to a confrontation."
On North Korea, he reaffirmed that the allies share the common goal of denuclearization and peace on the peninsula, with Washington leaving the door open for diplomacy with Pyongyang "without preconditions."
"We think the ball is in Pyongyang's court. We have indicated our willingness again to engage without preconditions ... We're awaiting a response from North Korea as well," he said.
He was guarded about whether he had talks with South Korean officials on the proposed declaration of a formal end to the 1950-53 Korean War.
Kritenbrink said he also had a "very productive exchange of views" during his meetings with the presidential nominees of South Korea's ruling and main opposition parties -- Lee Jae-myung of the Democratic Party and Yoon Seok-youl of the People Power Party.
He said he used the meetings as opportunities to convey Washington's strong commitment to its alliance with Seoul.
"I personally was quite gratified that both of the candidates stated their strong support for the alliance between our two great countries, and that alliance would continue in the years ahead," he added.
ejkim@yna.co.kr
(END)
6. S. Korea, IAEA hold talks on N. Korean nukes, Fukushima water release
S. Korea, IAEA hold talks on N. Korean nukes, Fukushima water release | Yonhap News Agency
SEOUL, Nov. 12 (Yonhap) -- South Korea and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) held high-level talks Friday to discuss North Korea's nuclear program, Japan's planned disposal of radioactive contaminated water and other issues, the foreign ministry said.
Ham Sang-wook, deputy foreign minister for multilateral and global affairs, met Massimo Aparo, the head of the IAEA department of safeguards, in Seoul, according to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
During the meeting, Ham requested the IAEA play a proactive role in enhancing transparency and safety regarding Japan's planned disposal of the wastewater from the crippled Fukushima nuclear power plant.
Tokyo plans to release the water that has been stored in tanks at the wrecked plant, possibly starting 2023.
Seoul and the IAEA have held high-level talks since 2013 to promote bilateral strategic communication.
colin@yna.co.kr
(END)
7. Korean presidential hopeful vows big foreign policy shifts
But will foreign policy have any significant influence on the outcome of the election? Certainly some positive views in this. But we do not get a vote.
Korean presidential hopeful vows big foreign policy shifts
Yoon Seok-yeol puts forth bold new thinking on policy toward Pyongyang and better relations with Tokyo
SEOUL Conservative presidential candidate Yoon Seok-yeol put forth a new initiative on Friday (November 12) to bring the two Koreas and United States together under one roof, while delivering withering criticism of the current South Korean administration’s Japan policy.
Yoon, standing for the opposition People Power Party, was speaking to foreign reporters in Seoul as the campaign for South Korea’s presidency heats up. The former prosecutor-general is running against ex-human rights lawyer, former provincial governor and wealth-distribution firebrand Lee Jae-myung of the ruling Democratic Party of Korea in the race for the presidential Blue House.
That race will climax with an election on March 9. Current President Moon Jae-in is constitutionally restricted to a single term.
Given the shortness of Yoon’s political career – which essentially kicked off after he resigned as chief of the prosecution service in March – major questions hang over his foreign policy chops.
Still, as one attendee noted, “any former prosecutor-general is very, very smart” and Yoon appeared well-briefed and on-form as he discussed wide-ranging geopolitical and geoeconomic issues.
In a swipe at the policy of the Moon administration – which right-wingers accuse of being overly eager or even deferential toward Pyongyang – he said North-South relations had “degenerated into a relationship between subordinates and superiors.”
Panmunjom has been suggested as headquarters of the joint body but it has a checkered history. Photo: AFP / Ed Jones
He said he would rebalance matters by promoting the construction of a sustainable trilateral diplomatic office with representatives of both Koreas and the US. He suggested the DMZ truce village of Panmunjom or Washington DC as potential locations for the body and its headquarters.
Currently, neither Seoul nor Washington has formal diplomatic relations with Pyongyang. That means that – officially, at least – the key communications channels between the parties are cross-border hotlines at Panmunjom and other points on the DMZ, as well as the North Korean diplomatic mission to the United Nations in New York.
A more permanent trilateral arrangement would allow the parties to meet more often rather than “from time to time, as a one-off event, as we have done so far,” Yoon said.
He suggested keeping talks at the three-party level rather than expanding them to the four-party level – including China – or the prior six-party format – including Japan and Russia.
“Once the three parties agree on effective denuclearization we can have extended talks with four parties or six parties,” he said. “It would be only a matter of getting international endorsement on our progress.”
Perhaps so, but the existing truce village of Panmunjom itself is arguably emblematic of Yoon’s proposal. Moreover, Pyongyang hardly has a positive history toward joint sites. US troops were killed at Panmunjom in 1976, and North Korea blew up a North-South liaison office in 2020.
Cooperation is in the economic sphere is also troubled. High-profile joint Korean commercial projects – an industrial park at Kaesong and a related resort complex at Mount Kumgang, both established inside North Korea with South Korean capital – were closed under prior conservative administrations in Seoul.
Despite his predecessor’s policies, Yoon appeared to favor such projects.
“I will push forward the ‘Inter-Korean Joint Economic Development Plan’ to prepare for the post-denuclearization era,” Yoon said. However, he had a pre-condition: It would require a “bold decision” by Pyongyang on denuclearization.
North Korea is always a core policy issue for South Korean presidential candidates. Here, paramilitary and public security forces march to celebrate the 73rd founding anniversary of North Korea at Kim Il Sung Square. Photo: AFP / KCNA / KNS
Yoon also dangled a carrot, proposing to revive currently frozen humanitarian exchanges, “…so North Korea can come back to the denuclearization negotiating table.”
While admitting that US administrations have never made North Korea a top priority, he also slammed past South Korean governments for their inconsistency. He would be a more responsible curator of inter-Korean relations, he insisted.
“If I become president, I will present a clear roadmap for denuclearizing North Korea,” Yoon said. “We need to convince our allies the US and Japan that the North Korean issue can be resolved.”
That reference to Japan as an ally was highly unusual for a South Korean politician. But Yoon spent a considerable portion of his time discussing improving ties with South Korea’s democratic neighbor while slamming Seoul’s recent antagonistic policies toward Tokyo.
A gentler stance toward Japan…
“I believe the current administration has almost zero diplomacy toward Japan,” he stormed. “Communications with Japan’s foreign ministry are almost non-existent.”
Modern Korean relations with Japan have consistently fallen afoul of disputes over Japan’s colonization of the peninsula and resultant legacies. In the last five years, ties have deteriorated to what are widely considered their nadir since diplomatic relations were normalized in 1965.
Under Moon, Seoul first overturned a prior bilateral agreement and related Japanese compensation package for surviving “comfort women.” Subsequently, Korean courts have seized Japanese corporate assets to compensate colonial-era forced laborers.
Tokyo, already seething over the comfort women issue, insisted that the latter step breached a 1965 agreement and compensation package, and withdrew trade privileges South Korea had enjoyed. Seoul swiftly retaliated in kind.
Yoon accused Moon of leveraging simmering anti-Japanese sentiment – an ever-present force in South Korea’s body politic – for domestic gain.
“Diplomacy should be well managed to create benefits for both parties but as of now, Japanese relations and diplomacy are used for Korean political purposes,” he said. “The current administration has been almost ruined relations with Japan.”
In fact, over the last year, Moon has publicly reached out to Japanese leaders in an apparent attempt to initiate a reset. However, Tokyo’s position is that Seoul must first resolve the court impasse.
South Korean sentiment toward Japan could not be described as amicable. South Korean protesters tear a huge Japanese flag during a rally near the Japanese embassy in Seoul in 2019. Photo: AFP / Jung Yeon-je
Yoon suggested a broad-based policy. “I will seek a comprehensive solution with Japan over past history issues, economic cooperation and security cooperation,” he said.
Security cooperation with Japan could raise eyebrows in South Korea’s other neighbor: China.
Policy toward China is an increasingly ticklish matter for South Korea. On the one hand, the country relies on the United States for security, while relying heavily on China, its leading trade partner, in the economic sphere. At a time when Beijing-Washington relations are tense, Seoul is increasingly pulled in both directions.
Yoon leaned toward Washington in his remarks, citing a famous – or infamous – promise made by Moon to Chinese President Xi Jinping.
“The ‘3 Nos’ policy of the Moon administration, I believe, is not a formal agreement, it is not an official promise, it is the current administration’s position,” he said.
Under the so-called “3 Nos,” Moon said South Korea would not join a security alliance with Japan; would not join a US missile-defense program; and would not extend the US deployment of Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) anti-missile units on the peninsula.
A THAAD unit was ostensibly deployed to defend against North Korean missiles before Moon entered office, but China angrily insisted that the unit’s radars can snoop on its own strategic assets. Resultant economic retaliation cost South Korea billions in boycotts of its products and companies in China, as well as via a drying up of Chinese tourists to South Korea.
The emplacement of a US THAAD missile battery led to Beijing launching economic retaliation against Seoul. Photo: AFP / Missile Defense Agency
South Korea’s foreign policy focus has traditionally been largely limited to familiar horizons: North Korea, China, Japan and the US.
At a time when Indo-Pacific security issues are generating greater attention across the region, Yoon seemed to follow in that policy groove, which may give some comfort to Beijing.
He was lukewarm on the possibility of joining the US-led “Quad” alliance and its “Five Eyes” intelligence-sharing network. He also suggested that South Korea did not need the kind of nuclear submarine technologies that the US is transferring to Australia under the “AUKUS” framework.
Speaking more broadly, Yoon argued for a rebalancing of Korea’s global relations along two separate axes: a Japan-South Korea-US axis and a China-Japan-South Korea axis.
And he was at pains to assure his audience that he is no dunce when it comes to foreign policy.
“As a prosecutor, I was interested in many different areas, not just indicting criminal cases. I dealt with cases on the economy and international issues,” Yoon said. “I read a lot of books…my knowledge and interest is broader than you think.”
He said that if he wins the presidency, he would extend Seoul’s global affairs outreach into advanced technologies, space development and climate change, while expanding its current overseas development aid programs.
8. Should Our Security Controls Be More Like North Korea or Norway?
Be like Norway, not north Korea!
So I guess the author is indicting all the organizations with draconian security protocols as being like north Korea. That makes quite an argument.
So we will see all users in organizations begin calling the IT security experts north Koreans.
Should Our Security Controls Be More Like North Korea or Norway?
If we reflect on the type of models that we tend to emulate when designing enterprise security controls, it may be shocking to discover that the best comparison is that of North Korea: tightly controlled regimes with constant monitoring; restricted information flows to prevent exfiltration of secrets; forced use of specific operating systems and images; and severe penalties for noncompliance, up to and including termination. Even buzzwords like zero trust seem to reflect the state of how people treat each other in North Korea. Is this the model of enterprise security that we really want? With such heavy-handed approaches, is it any wonder why security teams aren't often invited to the table?
Can we strive for something better? Instead of North Korea perhaps can we be like Norway, where people are free to interact and innovate to meet each other's needs and drive business growth. With each choice that we make in the design of our enterprise security controls, we can make our work environment feel more authoritarian or more free. We certainly need to be mindful of the trade-offs in relaxing our security posture, but some perceived trade-offs may actually be false dichotomies that artificially constrain our set of options for security controls.
For example, in the North Korea model, security puts sensors everywhere for the purposes of monitoring the citizenry. In the Norway model, sensors are placed for the benefit (or safety) of the citizens and security is a byproduct. In both cases, we still deploy sensors, but in the Norway model, the primary purpose of the sensor is for the sake of improving our lives.
Choose a People-Focused Approach
If we want a Norway model, security should not take the lead when it comes to activities that are the responsibility of the business or the owner of the asset. This would include gaining visibility or structural awareness of our assets and our environment. The asset owners should drive this, and security becomes a beneficiary. For example, a security-focused team can put security cameras at every street corner and face significant resistance from citizens. However, if the traffic cameras controlled signals to reduce travel delays, then there would be greater buy-in. Security can still be a beneficiary of the camera feeds, but the primary goal is to support faster movement. We will want to ensure that additional controls exist to prevent abuse of such monitoring (who watches the watchers?), but when the drive for additional visibility and awareness is led by the business, both the business and security benefit.
Many years ago, I ran a security-led experiment to see if employees would willingly volunteer to be closely monitored when there are clear benefits that they receive. I was considering the deployment of a user behavior-monitoring tool that was positioned as a way to counter insider threats (i.e., the North Korea model). If I gave people the opportunity to opt-in to the deployment of such software onto their endpoint, I imagine that I would have gotten very few takers. Instead, I positioned the tool as a way to understand how we might be able to identify and share best practices for our job functions (i.e., the Norway model). By monitoring our activities on the endpoint, we will find those actions that can help improve our performance based on what we observe from other high performers. Out of 100 people that we solicited, only four choose not to participate! With this approach, we had the buy-in to implement a tool that helped improve day-to-day productivity as the primary purpose, but we also had the secondary ability (with the proper oversight processes and controls) to counter insider threats if needed.
Success Requires Collaboration Across the Business
One of the key differences between the North Korea approach and the Norway approach is who leads these initiatives. For the experiment mentioned above, it could easily have been an initiative led by human resources (the "business," or asset owner) instead of security. After all, HR and most employees would fully support well-designed tools to improve employee performance. But when the initiative is security-led, suspicions arise and security teams will have difficulty getting the buy-in regardless of how noble their intentions may be.
Unfortunately, the business and asset owners sometimes don't care to lead initiatives that give them better visibility into their own environment. This is why security teams often get stuck with the job of improving asset inventories or trying to improve visibility. Even worse, security-led approaches can fail spectacularly when you encounter groups, such as developers, with significant influence or ability to avoid controls imposed by the security team.
Balancing strong security and high productivity for groups such as developers is nearly impossible with a North Korea model. That's why security teams should embrace developer-led or developer-friendly initiatives to increase visibility and observability. These efforts are primarily to drive developer productivity, and security becomes a beneficiary of the increased visibility that is offered through these business/owner-led initiatives.
As we accelerate our digital transformation, our employees will find more opportunities to innovate and create new business value. We want to have these environments be safe and secure, but if we lead purely with security in mind, then we should expect another dystopian future.
9. US repeats decision on when to change command has not yet come
It is a change of command when a Korean general assumes command of the ROK/US Combined Forces Command.
The headline is half misleading - yes it will be a change of command but it also implies this is a US decision. AdmiralKirby describes it correctly as an alliance decision.
“I’m not going to -- you’re asking me to assess now progress towards OPCON -- and I’m not going to do that. This is something that the alliance has to decide,” Pentagon spokesman John Kirby said in response to questions about whether more training would take place.
Although Admiral Kirby and other officials will not address the need for more training I will offer my opinion on training. Yes, more training is necessary especially after the degradation of readiness over the past 3 years due to US unilateral strategic decisions (June 2018) and COVID. But what the US must also be concerned about is the desire among some in Korea to scale back training to show Kim a reduction in hostile intent. There are those who want to forgo training and readiness (and thus deterrence) in the fantasy hope that Kim will allow north-South engagement and restart denuclearization negotiations. If the ROK continues on the path to reduce training the ROK/US Combined Forces COmmand will not be able to sustain readiness and deterrence. There will not much confidence in a ROK general if his political leaders are pushing for a reduction in training. This should worry leaders on both sides of the Pacific.
US repeats decision on when to change command has not yet come
US repeats decision on when to change command has not yet come
Published : Nov 11, 2021 - 15:22
Updated : Nov 12, 2021 - 17:29
Pentagon spokesman John Kirby speaks during a briefing at the Pentagon in Washington, Monday, Nov. 1, 2021. (AP-Yonhap)
South Korea and the US have not made any decisions on when Seoul will take over wartime operational control from Washington, the US Defense Department said Wednesday, amid signs of a rift in the allies’ position on the wartime role the US first assumed in the 1950-53 Korean War.
Last week, Gen. Paul LaCamera, the US military chief overseeing the 28,500 American troops here, said the two countries could make changes to South Korea’s plan to retake command by May next year or set a deadline, in what many here understood as pushing back the transfer.
President Moon Jae-in, who leaves office in May next year, pledged to complete the handover within his term, but for the last two years the allies have had to cut back on full-scale drills to test Seoul’s readiness because of the coronavirus pandemic.
“I’m not going to -- you’re asking me to assess now progress towards OPCON -- and I’m not going to do that. This is something that the alliance has to decide,” Pentagon spokesman John Kirby said in response to questions about whether more training would take place.
“The secretary and his counterpart have not made any kind of decisions on timing right now. It’s a conditions-based process,” Kirby said. The US insists on more test drills and stable regional security befitting for a command change, amid expanding military buildups by China and North Korea.
In December, Defense Minister Suh Wook is expected to “press hard” on fixing a transfer deadline when he meets his US counterpart at their annual security meeting in Seoul. Suh told lawmakers he believed that Gen. LaCamera was not hinting at delaying the handover.
“We’ve tried to see where the general was going with the words. But any commander could have said what he had said,” Suh told the parliamentary defense committee on Tuesday, adding that he will consult with the US commander and make some progress on the transfer while he is in office.
But experts said the Moon government would have to turn over work on the transfer to the next administration, and even then, agreeing on when to wrap up the work would remain elusive unless South Korea demonstrates overwhelming readiness to contain a more assertive North Korea.
Pyongyang, which demands concessions to return to nuclear talks with Seoul and Washington, said it would bolster its defense capabilities as part of self-defense, a reference leader Kim Jong-un uses to build on the regime’s nuclear arsenal.
Kim, who previously openly tried to level with North Koreans with tears in public appearances, is seen as working to cement his grip on power as the “infallible leader,” a title North Korea’s constitution reserves for Kim Il-sung -- Kim Jong-un’s grandfather, who founded the regime -- and Kim Jong-il, Kim Jong-un’s father.
10. Seoul monitoring N. Korea's move to mark 10th anniv. of Kim's leadership: ministry
Given all the recent reports of "elevation" of Kim Jong-un. - Dear Leader and Great Leader and the establishment of "Kimjongunism," perhaps we will see a major 10th anniversary celebration. I wonder what Kimm Yo-jong has up her sleeve?
We should also keep in mind, other than. Putin and Xi (and some other minor despots) Kim Jong-un has more experience as a national leader than most other countries around the world. Can we still consider him "young and inexperienced?"
Seoul monitoring N. Korea's move to mark 10th anniv. of Kim's leadership: ministry | Yonhap News Agency
By Choi Soo-hyang
SEOUL, Nov. 12 (Yonhap) -- South Korea is monitoring the possibility of North Korea holding a major event to celebrate the 10th anniversary of leader Kim Jong-un's rise to power, Seoul's unification ministry said Friday.
Kim assumed power in December 2011, following the sudden death of his late father and former leader Kim Jong-il.
"North Korea has not announced a plan for such a commemorative event as of now, but we will continue monitoring related moves as there are some needs for one to strengthen internal unity and evaluate the first year outcome of its five-year plan," deputy ministry spokesman Cha Duck-chul told a regular press briefing.
It refers to the North's economic development scheme unveiled at the country's eighth party congress in January, during which Kim admitted to a failure in his previous development plan and set out a new one.
The North was seen continuing to elevate Kim's political status marking the 10th year since he took power.
Last month, South Korea's National Intelligence Service said the North has removed portraits of Kim's father and grandfather, former leaders Kim Jong-il and Kim Il-sung, respectively, from the backdrop of official meetings.
The North is also internally using the term Kimjongunism, like the former leaders' Kimilsungism and Kimjongilism, according to the spy agency, and increasingly referring to Kim as "suryong," a Korean word for leader which had been reserved for his predecessors.
The moves appear to be part of the North's efforts to highlight people's loyalty to Kim after the ruling party endorsed him as the "general secretary" in January, Cha said.
Kim, meanwhile, has not made a public appearance for a month after delivering a speech at a defense exhibition on Oct. 11.
"We will continue monitoring moves related to Kim's public activities," the ministry official said, adding there were multiple cases where the North Korean leader's activities were not reported in its state media for a comparatively long time.
scaaet@yna.co.kr
(END)
11. N. Korea calls for efforts to achieve economic goals under five-year plan
What are the two biggest obstacles to economic success in north Korea? Central control of the economy and ideological based economics. (or simply having a 5 year plan - when have they ever worked?)
N. Korea calls for efforts to achieve economic goals under five-year plan | Yonhap News Agency
SEOUL, Nov. 12 (Yonhap) -- North Korea urged its people Friday to make utmost efforts to accomplish the country's five-year economic plan under the spirit of "unconditionality, thoroughness and accuracy."
The Rodong Sinmun, an organ of the North's ruling Workers' Party, emphasized only 50 days are left until the end of the first year in its five-year plan and called for an "aggressive spirit" to achieve the goals set out by the party.
At the country's eighth party congress in January, North Korean leader Kim Jong-un admitted to a failure in his previous development plan and unveiled a new scheme focusing on self-reliance amid a protracted border closure due to COVID-19 and global sanctions.
"The party's demand is for every sector and unit, not a particular one, to make progress," the newspaper said. "Let's finish this year's battle with victory under the spirit of unconditionality, thoroughness and accuracy."
In another article, the newspaper said many tasks set forth in the science research field have been completed, adding those still underway are also mostly in their final stages.
Last month, the North held a Cabinet meeting to review the country's economic performance in the third quarter, during which Vice Premier Pak Jong-gun criticized deficiencies and the "irresponsible attitude" of some workers.
scaaet@yna.co.kr
(END)
12. Moon's push for end-of-war declaration losing momentum: experts
A surprising article. All I ask of the Moon administration is to tell us how an end of war declaration will ensure the security of the ROK given the unrelenting threat from the north? Paper and words do not trump steel.
Moon's push for end-of-war declaration losing momentum: experts
President Moon Jae-in speaks during the 76th session of the United Nations General Assembly, at U.N. headquarters in New York, Sept. 21. AP-Yonhap
Next president unlikely to continue declaration initiative
By Jung Da-min
With less than six months left before President Moon Jae-in leaves office, his administration is making last-ditch efforts in its push for a declaration to formally end the Korean War, which he re-emphasized in a speech at the U.N. General Assembly, Sept. 21.
But many experts say the possibility of Moon realizing his goal is very low, citing the different interests and political situations in the countries involved in the matter ― the two Koreas, the United States and China. And the chance of his successor ― whoever it will be ― to continue to pursue an "end-of-war" declaration also seems slim because they are likely to seek their own North Korea policy, they added.
Since taking office in 2017, Moon has consistently pushed for engagement with North Korea. After a reconciliatory mood was created on the Korean Peninsula with three inter-Korean summits in 2018, the President proposed the idea of end-of-war declaration in his U.N. speech that year. Moon's proposal has since been made consistently, although his tone has differed according to the progress in denuclearization negotiations between North Korea and the United States.
Political watchers say Moon is making the last-ditch effort for progress with his proposal, so that the declaration would become part of his North Korea diplomacy legacy, and the next administration could continue with an engagement policy toward the North, based on this and other inter-Korean agreements made during his presidency.
A boy looks at a photo of a screen capture from the April 27, 2018, inter-Korean summit between President Moon Jae-in and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un at the Unification Observation Post in the border village of Paju, Gyeonggi Province, Oct. 4. AP-YonhapBut they say such efforts are unlikely to yield tangible results, considering the different views and domestic politics of the countries directly involved in the 1950-53 Korean War. While the Moon administration wants an end-of-war declaration first and then negotiations on denuclearization and inter-Korean relations ― as he will soon leave office ― the other countries have no specific reason to hurriedly make a deal as they more focused on domestic issues, according to political watchers.
Kim Jun-seok, a politics and diplomacy professor at Dongguk University, said it was very unlikely that China, the U.S. or North Korea would want to "give credit" to a president who will soon leave office as they will not be able to get any "return" from him. Therefore they would be more interested in continuing negotiations with the next president.
When looking at the domestic political situation in China, President Xi Jinping is seeking an unprecedented third term after serving two five-year terms by 2023, by overturning a Chinese Communist Party resolution passed during the Deng Xiaoping era.
Chinese President Xi Jinping applauds during an event at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, Oct. 9, commemorating the 110th anniversary of the Xinhai Revolution. AP-Yonhap"From Xi's point of view, a continuation of tensions on the Korean Peninsula helps internal solidarity in China," Kim said.
The professor said the U.S. is also uninterested in an end-of-war declaration at the moment, as President Joe Biden would want to show strong diplomatic policies to both the international community and the American people, following criticism over the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan.
"For Biden, making a reconciliatory gesture toward North Korea would be same as saying he wants to lose in next year's elections," Kim said, referring to the 2022 U.S. midterms in which all 435 seats in the House of Representatives and 34 of the 100 seats in the Senate will be contested.
U.S. President Joe Biden addresses a press conference at the COP26 U.N. Climate Change Conference in Glasgow, the U.K., Nov. 2. AFP-Yonhap
Moon Sung-mook, a senior researcher at the Korea Research Institute for National Strategy, said North Korea's stance is an important variable among others in deciding the viability of President Moon's end-of-war proposal.
"North Korea's leader Kim Jong-un has presented two prerequisites for the declaration, according to the country's state media and the South Korean National Intelligence Service. The first is South Korea's dropping of double standards and the second is the South's withdrawal of hostile policies toward the North," Moon said.
"What they are asking by demanding a dropping of double standards is acknowledgement of their development of nuclear weapons and relief of related sanctions in the international community … What they are asking by demanding a withdrawal of hostile policies is abolishing joint military exercises between the South and the U.S. and the withdrawal of the United States Forces Korea troops … Kim Jong-un's message is clear that he is not interested in the end-of-war declaration itself but cares more about the two prerequisites."
Moon said even though Kim agrees with President Moon's proposal as a starting point of denuclearization negotiations, the current COVID-19 pandemic situation, under which the North's isolation from the international community has been strengthened, is adding to the difficulties of holding any summit between the leaders.
North Korean leader Kim Jong-un delivers a speech during an event to celebrate the 76th anniversary of the country's Workers' Party of Korea in Pyongyang, in this Oct. 10, photo released by the North Korea's state-run Korean Central News Agency, the following day. YonhapHe also said the U.S. government's stance on declaring an end to the war is also different from that of South Korea in that Washington wants significant progress in denuclearization negotiations with the North ahead of any deal.
Despite such difficulties and obstacles ahead, the Moon administration is still seeking to make a progress in its push for the declaration. South Korean Ambassador to the U.S. Lee Soo-hyuck said during a press conference in Washington, D.C., Tuesday, that South Korea and the United States were actively discussing the possibility of the declaration, and working on drawing up a draft for it.
As to whether Moon's North Korea policy will be continued with by the next administration, Prof. Kim said the ruling Democratic Party of Korea's presidential candidate Lee Jae-myung is likely to pursue a similar engagement policy if elected, while the main opposition People Power Party's candidate Yoon Seok-youl is expected to seek strengthening the South Korea-U.S. alliance and continuing dialogue with the North at the same time.
"But it is unlikely that either Lee or Yoon, if elected, will continue to seek a declaration ending the war following the Moon administration, as there are obstacles ahead and so they are likely to pursue their own North Korea policies," the professor said.
V/R
David Maxwell
Senior Fellow
Foundation for Defense of Democracies
Phone: 202-573-8647
Twitter: @davidmaxwell161
FDD is a Washington-based nonpartisan research institute focusing on national security and foreign policy.
